Dr. Whoof:You know, I like these folks, people who will take a stand that is not only unpopular now, but will be judged as downright evil by future historians. History needs its villains, and bravo for all these bigoted farks providing fodder for those thirty to forty years from now who need people to hold up as examples of real human evil. Much like the anti-civil rights folks of the 60s, and the Nazis before them, these folks are providing a valuable service, being history's douchenozzles.

You obviously don't understand the progressive mindset. In the future, something that YOU do or say today is going to get you put in the same group as the B&B owner in this story. Because progressivism is never achieved; it keeps morphing into something else in order to have continuous outrage and something new to control. Jim Crow laws were brought to us by the progressives, so the B&B owner would be a model progressive 60 years ago. The movement will turn on you just as it turned on him.

Gdalescrboz:Nacc: joness0154: qorkfiend: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you. Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

Who's forcing anyone to do anything?

Well, there is the cake shop in Colorado forced to make cakes for same sex couples. It's not a stretch to assume it could happen to this guy.

I'm as pro gay marriage as it comes, but disagree forcing these companies to do business if they don't want. I also don't understand why a couple would be adamant about giving that person business if they're adamantly against their lifestyle.

Change the source of this article to it being about black people or an interracial couple. Your defense of said bigotry still fits. Why should those racists have to do business with a couple of darkies or darkie apologists....

It's because it's wrong to discriminate. If you are a bigot you will be found and painted as the bigot you are. People should know you're a bigot so they can vote with their wallet. You have a right to be a bigot and we have a right to know so we can refuse to patronize.

This is truly amazing. A guy gets sued for turning down a gay marriage,(never intended to make a spectacle of it) and you think it's ok...no, your right...nay, your duty, to conduct a smear campaign against him and destroy his life. Yet at the same time you bleeding heart liberals are the first to line up to crucify a 12 year old kid for any sleight that can be twisted in to bullying. The stupidity the left displays in matters pertaining to an individuals right to run his business how he wants without it turning in to a witch hunt is astounding. It's like watching Nancy Grace; pure, blind, unwarranted hate that you can't put in to a rational argument. So much so that's it's to the point that deep down inside, you have to know its absurd, you have to know that you are a hypocritical douche but you are afr ...

You long winded and insane ramblings aside, discrimination is still morally wrong. Your government made it illegal as well a long time ago.

This isn't difficult to understand. It's a very simple statement. Discrimination is wrong.

Penoatle:gshepnyc: Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.

I agree 100%. And I look forward to them being remembered in the not-so-distant future the same way we remember those valiant, rugged businessmen who said they would never serve blacks in their establishments. Because we remember those people for taking a brave stand for private business, right?

Is there something similar to Godwin where instead of bringing up Nazis we bring up segregation?

"We have the right to refuse service" is different than "No Coloreds".

Again though, I could care less. Just trying to figure out the full issue to these bandwagons people hop on.

I find it almost unbelievable that you honestly think this way for real, but you don't give off troll-vibes, so I'm guessing you either don't think very hard at all or you just want to feel comfortable in your delusional worldview where anyone can just do what they want if they have a business. You are bright enough to be aware that the success of those private businesses depends greatly on federal, state and municipal services that we all support and pay for, which totally sucks your argument dry, don't you?

whatsupchuck:Gay couples have a right to equal access to public accommodations. Private business owners have the right to be homophobic dickheads. When push comes to shove in a court action to resolve this conflict, guess who almost always wins?

Hint: There has to be a legitimate business interest for the refusal of service.

Is that good enough? If you run a business utilized by a lot of rednecks, you can't use the excuse that many of them will leave and negatively impact your revenue as a reason for refusing service to black people... even if it's true.

To everyone clutching their pearls and crying, "Smear campaign!" How, exactly, is it a smear campaign to say what really happened to you? Is anything this couple is saying untrue? Are they exaggerating? Telling the truth is not a smear campaign. Why do you want to take away someone's free speech?

The fact is that this business owner has judged that his market will not punish him for his actions. He may be right. He may be wrong. But simply telling people about the business owner's actions? That is not infringing on anyone's rights. The only infringement of rights are from the people who want to enforce silence.

ursomniac:Dimensio: HenryFnord: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you. Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

"No coloreds"

This circumstance is different. This person's discrimination is motivated by religious belief, therefore it must be allowed. Religious belief creates special justification otherwise not present for objectionable behaviour.

False.

This person's CLAIM is that it's motivated by religious belief, yet they seem to ONLY APPLY said belief when it comes to same-sex couples.

Otherwise, they'd refuse service to anyone who didn't share their religious beliefs: no Jews, no Muslims, no atheists, no pagans, no DIVORCED people, and so on.

The "justification" you refer to applies to not being discriminated because of your OWN religious affiliation; if you're Hindu the B&B can't deny you service because you're a Hindu. It's not a club you can use to conveniently exclude a section of the general population from services you provide to the general population. Of course this doesn't apply to religious organizations; a Catholic church doesn't have to host a Hindu wedding. But this B&B isn't a church - it just wants to be a B&B that conveniently only ever has heterosexuals present.

Plus if you gave your "justification" ANY amount of thought, you'd realize it's just a smokescreen: let's use an obvious example:

A: Evangelical B&B owner claims he has the right to deny service if it would "violate his beliefs"B: Potential client is a Muslim who will want to pray in his rented room

Whose religious beliefs trump whose? If A wins, then it's an obvious discrimination of B on the basis of religion which is a violation of the 14th Amendment. If B wins, then it's (by your logic) discrimination of A on the basis of religion which is a violation of the 14th Amendment.

... at which point the universe becomes lawyers all the wa ...

So how do you resolve this paradox? There's only one solution, which is that the owner has absolute discretion. Gays, muslims etc are welcome to ban Chrisitans from their homes too. The whole "open to the public" thing is just nonsense perpetrated by thinly veiled authoritarianists.

DrPainMD:Dr. Whoof: You know, I like these folks, people who will take a stand that is not only unpopular now, but will be judged as downright evil by future historians. History needs its villains, and bravo for all these bigoted farks providing fodder for those thirty to forty years from now who need people to hold up as examples of real human evil. Much like the anti-civil rights folks of the 60s, and the Nazis before them, these folks are providing a valuable service, being history's douchenozzles.

You obviously don't understand the progressive mindset. In the future, something that YOU do or say today is going to get you put in the same group as the B&B owner in this story. Because progressivism is never achieved; it keeps morphing into something else in order to have continuous outrage and something new to control. Jim Crow laws were brought to us by the progressives, so the B&B owner would be a model progressive 60 years ago. The movement will turn on you just as it turned on him.

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.

I agree 100%. And I look forward to them being remembered in the not-so-distant future the same way we remember those valiant, rugged businessmen who said they would never serve blacks in their establishments. Because we remember those people for taking a brave stand for private business, right?

Is there something similar to Godwin where instead of bringing up Nazis we bring up segregation?

"We have the right to refuse service" is different than "No Coloreds".

Again though, I could care less. Just trying to figure out the full issue to these bandwagons people hop on.

I find it almost unbelievable that you honestly think this way for real, but you don't give off troll-vibes, so I'm guessing you either don't think very hard at all or you just want to feel comfortable in your delusional worldview where anyone can just do what they want if they have a business. You are bright enough to be aware that the success of those private businesses depends greatly on federal, state and municipal services that we all support and pay for, which totally sucks your argument dry, don't you?

Penoatle:gshepnyc: Penoatle: Private business, private rules. Why is this so hard to understand?

Really, someone tell me why people cannot operate their business the way they want to. Why do we get this foamy BS from either side.

I could care less but I know this thread will blow up with the usual crap.

I agree 100%. And I look forward to them being remembered in the not-so-distant future the same way we remember those valiant, rugged businessmen who said they would never serve blacks in their establishments. Because we remember those people for taking a brave stand for private business, right?

Is there something similar to Godwin where instead of bringing up Nazis we bring up segregation?

"We have the right to refuse service" is different than "No Coloreds".

Again though, I could care less. Just trying to figure out the full issue to these bandwagons people hop on.

DrPainMD:Dr. Whoof: You know, I like these folks, people who will take a stand that is not only unpopular now, but will be judged as downright evil by future historians. History needs its villains, and bravo for all these bigoted farks providing fodder for those thirty to forty years from now who need people to hold up as examples of real human evil. Much like the anti-civil rights folks of the 60s, and the Nazis before them, these folks are providing a valuable service, being history's douchenozzles.

You obviously don't understand the progressive mindset. In the future, something that YOU do or say today is going to get you put in the same group as the B&B owner in this story. Because progressivism is never achieved; it keeps morphing into something else in order to have continuous outrage and something new to control. Jim Crow laws were brought to us by the progressives, so the B&B owner would be a model progressive 60 years ago. The movement will turn on you just as it turned on him.

Yes. That is exactly how "progressivism" works. Progress, on the other hand, just means that more people will have rights. If you are not discriminating against people, this will not be a problem. Of course, as the song goes, "Everyone's A Little Bit Racist." Everyone holds some prejudice they may not even be aware of. What good people do is look at their prejudice and deal with it. What bad people do is pretend that God wants them to be prejudice.

DrPainMD:Gay marriage: because everybody has the right to freedom of associationequal protection under the law.

Anti-discrimination laws: because people don't have the right to freedom of associationequal protection under the law.

In the immortal words of the great philosopher Townshend: "meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

Bigots still have the freedom to associate and spew their bigotry under the first amendment. But in the process of doing so, they cannot infringe on the right of others to equal protection. It's pretty simple.

DrPainMD:Gay marriage: because everybody has the right to freedom of association.

Anti-discrimination laws: because people don't have the right to freedom of association.

In the immortal words of the great philosopher Townshend: "meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

Is this B&B a private club? If so, then it has the right to limit who it lets in under the law. A club is a lot like a private home. Your free to invite or not invite anyone you want. Is the B&B open to the public? Well, that's a different story. Of course, at this time, gay people are not recognized as a protected class (although, ironically, business owners like the one in the article seem to be building the case that they should be). Since they are not a protected class under Illinois or Federal law, the business owner is free to decide to exclude gay people. His business judgment says his market is mainly straight people who will have no problem with hum claiming that God wants him to exclude gays. His business judgment is either right or wrong. Either way, it is only his action that will reward or punish him.

That is, unless, you think there should be a gag order on the gay couple that would take away their free speech. Is that what your saying? People should not be allowed to talk about the way a business treats them or take legal action that is available to them? Well, it sure looks like the only one want to infringe on freedom is you.

flup:He's gonna learn the lesson ChickFilA learned. Their business has dwindled to nearly nothing since they publicly adopted their anti-gay stance.

I had to look into such a grand claim. According to Forbes, Dan Cathy went from #89 in 2012 on the Forbes 400 to #68 in 2013. I don't want to get into that whole mess. But I don't think that if his business had "dwindled to nearly nothing", as you say, he would have jumped 21 spots on the Forbes 400.

Billygoat Gruff:Don't a lot of business in Myrtle Beach close up shop for the week during the Black Biker Rally there? I wonder when they will be forced to stay open?

It's amazing that you decided to come in here and pretend to be so incredibly farking stupid as to not recognize the difference between being open and refusing service to some people and being closed and not serving anyone.

DrPainMD:You obviously don't understand the progressive mindset. In the future, something that YOU do or say today is going to get you put in the same group as the B&B owner in this story. Because progressivism is never achieved; it keeps morphing into something else in order to have continuous outrage and something new to control. Jim Crow laws were brought to us by the progressives, so the B&B owner would be a model progressive 60 years ago. The movement will turn on you just as it turned on him.

DrPainMD:Dr. Whoof: You know, I like these folks, people who will take a stand that is not only unpopular now, but will be judged as downright evil by future historians. History needs its villains, and bravo for all these bigoted farks providing fodder for those thirty to forty years from now who need people to hold up as examples of real human evil. Much like the anti-civil rights folks of the 60s, and the Nazis before them, these folks are providing a valuable service, being history's douchenozzles.

You obviously don't understand the progressive mindset. In the future, something that YOU do or say today is going to get you put in the same group as the B&B owner in this story. Because progressivism is never achieved; it keeps morphing into something else in order to have continuous outrage and something new to control. Jim Crow laws were brought to us by the progressives, so the B&B owner would be a model progressive 60 years ago. The movement will turn on you just as it turned on him.

This is very true and I will add that things like anti-semitism, eugenics and racial supremicism *were* the progressive ideas of their day. Progressives only morphed toward other causes *after* the true consequences of those ideas became known. Just like progressives used to insist that Soviet Russia was a workable alternative to western hegemony *right up to* when the Berlin wall came down. Soon, when the foolishness of climate alarmism becomes unavoidable, those progressives will go and find something else to latch on to. As Dr Pain points out, Dr Whoof might fall foul of it. Indeed, for this reason, most progressives are miserable during the latter part of their lives.

THE GREAT NAME:Once they're done forcing you to marry homosexuals, they'll start forcing you to perform late term abortions. After that you'll be forced to operate the gas chambers in which they will put all the climate change deniers. And they won't even see the irony, because their brains don't work that way.

give me doughnuts:Gdalescrboz: Nacc: joness0154: qorkfiend: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you. Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

Who's forcing anyone to do anything?

Well, there is the cake shop in Colorado forced to make cakes for same sex couples. It's not a stretch to assume it could happen to this guy.

I'm as pro gay marriage as it comes, but disagree forcing these companies to do business if they don't want. I also don't understand why a couple would be adamant about giving that person business if they're adamantly against their lifestyle.

Change the source of this article to it being about black people or an interracial couple. Your defense of said bigotry still fits. Why should those racists have to do business with a couple of darkies or darkie apologists....

It's because it's wrong to discriminate. If you are a bigot you will be found and painted as the bigot you are. People should know you're a bigot so they can vote with their wallet. You have a right to be a bigot and we have a right to know so we can refuse to patronize.

This is truly amazing. A guy gets sued for turning down a gay marriage,(never intended to make a spectacle of it) and you think it's ok...no, your right...nay, your duty, to conduct a smear campaign against him and destroy his life. Yet at the same time you bleeding heart liberals are the first to line up to crucify a 12 year old kid for any sleight that can be twisted in to bullying. The stupidity the left displays in matters pertaining to an individuals right to run his business how he wants without it turning in to a witch hunt is astounding. It's like watching Nancy Grace; pure, blind, unwarranted hate that you can't put in to a rational argument. So much so that's it's to the point that deep down inside, you have to know its absurd, you have to know that you are a hypocritical douche but you are afr ...

You're just doubling down on the derp today.

No no I apologize, my post was having these awful stomach cramps, this was the peanutty/corn injected diharreah that ejected at high speeds, and now....silent crampless relief.

InterruptingQuirk:flup: He's gonna learn the lesson ChickFilA learned. Their business has dwindled to nearly nothing since they publicly adopted their anti-gay stance.

I had to look into such a grand claim. According to Forbes, Dan Cathy went from #89 in 2012 on the Forbes 400 to #68 in 2013. I don't want to get into that whole mess. But I don't think that if his business had "dwindled to nearly nothing", as you say, he would have jumped 21 spots on the Forbes 400.

xria:InterruptingQuirk: flup: He's gonna learn the lesson ChickFilA learned. Their business has dwindled to nearly nothing since they publicly adopted their anti-gay stance.

I had to look into such a grand claim. According to Forbes, Dan Cathy went from #89 in 2012 on the Forbes 400 to #68 in 2013. I don't want to get into that whole mess. But I don't think that if his business had "dwindled to nearly nothing", as you say, he would have jumped 21 spots on the Forbes 400.

skozlaw:DrPainMD: You obviously don't understand the progressive mindset. In the future, something that YOU do or say today is going to get you put in the same group as the B&B owner in this story. Because progressivism is never achieved; it keeps morphing into something else in order to have continuous outrage and something new to control. Jim Crow laws were brought to us by the progressives, so the B&B owner would be a model progressive 60 years ago. The movement will turn on you just as it turned on him.

[www.quickmeme.com image 425x365]

Taking a crappy response and putting it as a caption on a picture of nobody in particular = still a crappy response.

ursomniac:Dimensio: HenryFnord: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you. Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

"No coloreds"

This circumstance is different. This person's discrimination is motivated by religious belief, therefore it must be allowed. Religious belief creates special justification otherwise not present for objectionable behaviour.

False.

This person's CLAIM is that it's motivated by religious belief, yet they seem to ONLY APPLY said belief when it comes to same-sex couples.

Otherwise, they'd refuse service to anyone who didn't share their religious beliefs: no Jews, no Muslims, no atheists, no pagans, no DIVORCED people, and so on.

The "justification" you refer to applies to not being discriminated because of your OWN religious affiliation; if you're Hindu the B&B can't deny you service because you're a Hindu. It's not a club you can use to conveniently exclude a section of the general population from services you provide to the general population. Of course this doesn't apply to religious organizations; a Catholic church doesn't have to host a Hindu wedding. But this B&B isn't a church - it just wants to be a B&B that conveniently only ever has heterosexuals present.

Plus if you gave your "justification" ANY amount of thought, you'd realize it's just a smokescreen: let's use an obvious example:

A: Evangelical B&B owner claims he has the right to deny service if it would "violate his beliefs"B: Potential client is a Muslim who will want to pray in his rented room

Whose religious beliefs trump whose? If A wins, then it's an obvious discrimination of B on the basis of religion which is a violation of the 14th Amendment. If B wins, then it's (by your logic) discrimination of A on the basis of religion which is a violation of the 14th Amendment.

... at which point the universe becomes lawyers all the wa ...

Well said, and since I'm still reading through the thread it may have been said already. The bible was used as justification for slavery and segregation. All that sons of Ham stuff and there offspring being forced to serve others.

Billygoat Gruff:Don't a lot of business in Myrtle Beach close up shop for the week during the Black Biker Rally there? I wonder when they will be forced to stay open?

They wouldn't. But, if they are open, they have to be careful not to discriminate against a protected class. For example, the B&B owner is free to close his business. If it is open, he still currently free to deny some people because they are gay (gay is not a protected class in Illinois or at the Federal level). Of course, if his market gets angry at him for denying gay people service, his business will suffer. But it will suffer because of his bad decision.

Going back to your example, if the customers of Myrtle Beach businesses no longer want to frequent those businesses because bikers are excluded, the Myrtle beach business owners may rethink their business plans vis a vis bikers. If bikers were a protected class, then the bikers would also have recourse under the law if a business was open and refused to serve them.

kukukupo:I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you. Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

The same way white people in the 60s didn't understand why the black people could force businesses to let them sit at the lunch counter.

ciberido:Penoatle: "We have the right to refuse service" is different than "No Coloreds".

I have to admit I'm curious what wild flights of fancy has lead you to this particular conclusion. How exactly are they different?

If those two things are the same, then business owners could be prevented from refusing service to anyone for any reason, on the basis that it is (or might be) discrimination. At that point, the decision about who does business with whom is being taken by government, not individuals.

It's just another route towards stateism and the centralization of power.

joness0154:qorkfiend: kukukupo: I still fail to understand how you can FORCE someone to do business with you. Then again, if the government can force you to buy a product, I guess it is only fair that you can force a business to sell it to you.

Who's forcing anyone to do anything?

Well, there is the cake shop in Colorado forced to make cakes for same sex couples. It's not a stretch to assume it could happen to this guy.

I'm as pro gay marriage as it comes, but disagree forcing these companies to do business if they don't want. I also don't understand why a couple would be adamant about giving that person business if they're adamantly against their lifestyle.

It isn't about going to any particular business, it's about saying it isn't permissible for public businesses to say things like "no blacks" "no gays" "no irish" "no jews" or whatever. A place of public accommodation, like a hotel doesn't get to just wing it however they want when it comes to discrimination.